The victim is nothing more than 200 that the victim tried to avoid the blick of the defendant himself/herself. Even if the price act of the defendant is recognized, the victim was issued a medical certificate after the lapse of 2 days from the date of the occurrence of the instant case, and the victim suffered injury that requires four weeks' medical treatment due to the price act of the 70th defendant.

It is difficult to believe.

Nevertheless, the defendant injured the victim.

The lower court, which determined the person as above, erred by misapprehending the legal principles or mistake of facts.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim is sufficiently recognized as indicated in the lower judgment.

The statements of the victim and F concerning the circumstances, contents, etc. of the defendant's violence are specific and consistent.

The witness K of the lower court did not see the physical contact between the Defendant and the victim, but the victim was cited.

Handphones have considerably fallen back from the location where the victim was living, and there is a fact that the victim made a resistance to the Defendant by asking the Handphones cost damaged to the Defendant.

When the victim voluntarily Handphones as alleged by the Defendant, as the victim and K’s statement, the victim Handphones down in a considerable distance from the place where the victim took place, such as the victim and K’s statement.

In full view of the fact that it is difficult to recognize, the Defendant had a substantial physical force on the part of the victim who used handphones at the time.

may be appointed by a person.

The victim did not feel any particular pain immediately after the occurrence of the instant case, but she slickly snicked on the part of the victim, and she slicked on the part of the hand during the weekend, and she slicker on April 3, 2017.